9 Norwegian Antisemitism After 1945

Kjetil Braut Simonsen 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945

Current Knowledge

Abstract: How did the Second World Warand the trauma of the German occupation affect the extent and nature of Norwegian antisemitism after 1945? This article provides an overviewofresearch dealingwith postwar and contemporary antisemitism in Norway. Furthermore, it seeks to suggest some directions for further research. One priority,itargues, should be to analyse the development of Norwegian postwar antisemitism on abroad historicalbasis. Postwar antisemitism has gone through different stages since 1945. Which elements of antisemitism survivedthe experience of the Holocaust,which have been weakened, and which have faded away?Another important dimension for further research is the scope and development of Norwegian everydayantisemitism,asadiscourse and as aform of practice. How has antisemitism been expressedoutside of the public sphere, and how has this affected the Jewish minorityinNorway?

Keywords: Antisemitism; anti-Zionism; attitudes;far right; historiography; Nor- way; post-Second World War.

The defeat of the Hitler regime in 1945and revelations of the scope of Nazi crimes duringthe Second World Warmark aturning point in the history of Euro- pean antisemitism. Due to the experiencesduringthe Second World War, “fascist ideologyquicklybecame indeliblylinked to savagery and extermination in the European and Americanpublic imagination.”¹ As aresult,Swedish historian Henrik Bachner concludes, anti-Jewishsentiments – at least in their open, political form – wereconsistentlyrejected in the public sphere after 1945:

The culture of prejudice,which earlier was tolerated to acertain degree, was no longer accepted[rumsren]. Anti-Jewish and antisemitic sentimentsand ideas became taboo.²

However,this public rejection of antisemitism did not lead to its disappearance as a latentcultural structure of stereotypes and negative representations.Ashas

 Matthew Feldman and Paul Jackson, “Introduction,” in Doublespeak:The Rhetoric of the Far Right since 1945,ed. Matthew Feldman and Paul Jackson (Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag,2014), 7.  Henrik Bachner, Återkomsten. Antisemitism iSverigeefter 1945 (Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 2004), 15.Translation by Simonsen.

OpenAccess. ©2020 Kjetil Braut Simonsen,published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the CreativeCommons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110634822-011 174 Kjetil Braut Simonsen been noted in several studies, antisemitism has continued to occur in less visible contexts, such as in everydaydiscourse and internal communication within dis- tinct groups.³ What was the impact of the war and the trauma of the German occupation on the extent and nature of Norwegian antisemitism after 1945? How has anti- semitismdeveloped from 1945tothe present?Like other countries occupied by Nazi Germanyduring the Second World War, Norwaywas deeplyaffected by the Holocaust.Altogether,773 Jews from Norwayweredeported, most of them sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau. Onlythirty-eight of these deportedJews sur- vived. In total, the Nazis and their collaborators murdered between thirty and forty per cent of the Jews living in Norwaybefore the German occupation.⁴ This article provides an overview of existing research on postwar and contemporary antisemitism. It seeks to summarize the current state of knowledge on the scope, nature, and development of Norwegian antisemitism after the Hol- ocaust.Furthermore, and in extension to this,italsopresents some suggestions for further research.

Generalworks

Formanydecades, antisemitism in Norwaywas exploredbyhistorians onlytoa limited extent.However,starting in the 1990s, knowledge of the subject has been greatlyexpanded. The exclusion of Jews in the Norwegian Constitution of 1814,⁵ representations of the Jewinthe dailyand satirical press duringthe first decades of the twentieth century,⁶ the debate leading up to the prohibition of Jewish re-

 See for example JanWeyand, “Das Konzept der Kommunikationslatenz und der Fortschritt in der soziologischen Antisemitismusforschung,” Jahrbuch fürAntisemitismusforschung 26 (2017): 37–58. Weyand claims that acoreof“der beobachtetenVeränderungdes Antisemitismus nach 1945[ist]: Er wirdzwar in der Öffentlichkeit skandalisiert,kannimprivaten Raum aber weitgehend ungehindert artikuliert werden” (the observed change in antisemitism after 1945: Al- though it is scandalous in public, it can be voiced relatively freelyinthe private sphere). Quo- tation on p. 47.  On the Holocaust in Norway, see in particular Bjarte Bruland, Holocaust iNorge:Registrering. Deportortasjon. Tilintetgjørelse (Oslo:Dreyerforlag, 2017).  The ideological background of this article of the Constitutionisanalysedindetail in Håkon Harket, Paragrafen: Eidsvold 1814 (Oslo:Dreyer, 2014). An anthology in English is also published on the subject,see ChristhardHoffmann, ed., The Exclusion of Jews in the Norwegian Constitution of 1814: Origins – Contexts – Consequences (Berlin: Metropol, 2016.)  Lars Lien, “‘…pressen kan kunskrive ondtomjøderne.’ Jøden som kulturell konstruksjon i norsk dags- og vittighetspresse 1905–1925” (PhD thesis, University of Oslo, 2016). 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 175 ligious slaughter in 1929,⁷ and the antisemitism of the fascist collaborationist party Nasjonal Samling⁸ are among the topics that have now been thoroughly ex- amined. Several works have also outlinedthe history of Norwegian antisemitism before 1945inamore general sense.⁹ Still, very little of this research has focused on the historicaldevelopment of antisemitism in Norway after the Holocaust.Nosingle work analysingthe extent and development of antisemitism in Norwegian society from 1945tothe present currentlyexists. The book that comes closest to being ageneral historicalaccount,atleast from 1945tothe mid-1980s, is the second volume of Oskar Mendelsohn’s Jødenes historie iNorge. In this broad synthesis, Mendelsohn points to several examples of antisemitism in Norwayatdifferent times in the postwar period. Mendelsohn claims that open, political antisemitism never attained the sameintensity as in Central and Eastern Europe. He also states thatthe conditions for anti-Jewish thoughtwerefurther weakened duringthe postwarperiod.¹⁰ In Jødenes historie iNorge, antisemitic attitudes and actionsare described as “setbacks” within the framework of agenerallypositive development:

But setbacksoccur. Several [people] claim to recognize some elementsofantisemitism or related features in statements fromcertain extreme political circles sincethe late1960s. Also, cases of what can be called vulgarantisemitism have occurredand most likelystill occur,inthe form of derogatory comments and crude remarks … They show that inherited beliefs about the Jews maystill live on …¹¹

Mendelsohn alsomentions that antisemitic narratives such as Holocaust denial werecommon among the organized groups of former members of Nasjonal Sam-

 Andreas Snildal, “An Anti-Semitic Slaughter Law? The Origins of the Norwegian Prohibition of Jewish Religious Slaughter.1890 –1930” (PhD thesis, University of Oslo, 2014).  Kjetil BrautSimonsen, “VidkunQuisling, antisemittismen og den paranoide stil,” Historisk tidsskrift 4(2017): 446–67.  See, for example, Oskar Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie iNorge gjennom 300 år,vol. 1(Oslo:Uni- versitetsforlaget, 1969), 488–96 and 556–70;Terje Emberland, “Antisemittismen iNorge 1900 – 1940,” in Jødehat: Antisemittismens historie fraantikken til idag,ed. Trond Berg Eriksen, Håkon Harket, and Einhart Lorenz (Oslo:Cappelen Damm, 2005), 401–20;Per Ole Johansen, Ossselv nærmest: Norge og jødene 1914–1943 (Oslo:Gyldendal, 1984), and Einhart Lorenz, “Vi har ikke invitert jødene hit til landet – norskesyn på jødene ietlangtidsperspektiv” in Forestillinger om jøder:Aspekter vedkonstruksjonenavenminoritet 1814–1940,ed. Øivind Kopperud and Vibeke Moe (Oslo:Unipub, 2011), 35–52.  Oskar Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie iNorge gjennom 300 år,vol. 2(Oslo:Universitetsforlaget, 1987), 364.  Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie,vol. 2, 364.TranslationbySimonsen. 176 Kjetil Braut Simonsen ling and within otherright-wing circles.¹² He cites several examples in which Nor- wegian national newspapers,such as Arbeiderbladet, Dagbladet, Aftenposten, and Verdens Gang,took aclear public stance against antisemitism.¹³ While it is based on ahugeamountofempirical material, Mendelsohn’s book has several shortcomings. Forone thing,the book is more achronicle of sources than ahistorical analysis. Antisemitism is documented through individ- ual cases, and the author makes few efforts to summarize his findingsortodis- cuss the characteristics and functionsofpostwar antisemitism more systemati- cally. In other words, the book reveals interesting empirical data and contains manyhistorical details,but it givesnogeneral evaluation of postwar antisemitism as aphenomenon. As general studies of the historicaldevelopment of postwar antisemitism in Norwayare lacking,much of the knowledge sought has to be gleaned from works focusing on either specific political groups,topics, or individuals. In the following,Iwill discuss the different aspects of postwar antisemitism themati- cally. One subtopic is public discourse and the creation of an anti-antisemitic taboo after 1945. Asecond theme is the continuity of far-right antisemitism.A third theme is leftist antisemitism and anti-Zionism. Afourth topic is contemporary antisemitism:research dealing with present manifestations of antisemitism rather than its historical development.For all of these, Iwill discuss the most relevant available researchand use this to try to outline the current state of knowledge.

Public discourseand everyday antisemitism

As alreadynoted, the National Socialist policy of persecution – especiallythe Holocaust – led to aprofound changeinpublic discourse in Western Europe. This also became the caseinthe Scandinavian countries.During the first decades of the twentieth century,negative stereotypes of the Jewweretoalarge degree accepted within the public sphere. Both in satirical magazines and mainstream newspapers,the Jewwas represented as the incarnation of capitalism, communism, and other “threatening” phenomena.¹⁴ In the shadow of the Holo- caust after 1945, this cultureofprejudice was no longer salonfähig. However,the

 Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie,vol. 2, 365–366.  Mendelsohn, Jødenes historie,vol. 2, 346–54,367– 68.  See Lien, “…pressen kankun skriveondt”;Lars M. Andersson, En jude är en jude är en jude …: Representationer av “juden” isvenskskämtpress omkring 1900–1930 (Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2000). 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 177

Holocaust experience alsocreated an imageofantisemitism as aphenomenon more or lessexclusively associatedwith Nazism and political extremism. Such interpretations, Swedish historian Henrik Bachner states,haveled to a “partial blindness towards milder forms of antisemitism, towardsprejudices rooted in cultureand negative attitudes passed on by broader segments of the population.”¹⁵ In Norway, the changeinpublic expressions of antisemitism since 1945has not been analysed in depth. Nor has the question of the degree to which everydayantisemitism survivedinnon-official contexts. Still, the theme has been touched upon in several works.Four of them will be discussed below. In his book “Jødefolket inntar en særstilling.” Norskehaldningar til jødane og staten Israel,historian Karl Egil Johansen analyses the changeinattitudes towards Israel and Jews between 1945and 2008. Johansen’sfocus is primarily on discussions of Israel/Palestine, which will be analysed in detail later in this article. However,Johansen also presents material which shows how the anti-antisemitic norm affected public discourse in postwarNorway. Of particular interest is his discussion of the antisemitic wave at the end of 1959and the be- ginning of 1960.Starting in Cologne, more thantwo thousand five hundred in- cidentsofantisemitism wereregistered worldwide from December 1959toFebru- ary–March 1960.InNorway, anti-Jewishslogans and swastikas were painted at several spots in Oslo and other parts of the country.One Jewish businessman re- ceivedthreats by letter.¹⁶ As Johansen shows, these incidents triggered disap- provingreactions in the Norwegianpress,which sharplycondemned both Naz- ism and antisemitism. The leading newspaper Morgenbladet,for example, stated that the mentality which had led to the Holocaust would not be tolerated.¹⁷ How- ever,although antisemitismwas universallycondemned, some newspapers tend- ed to trivialize the incidents, describing them as aform of apolitical hooliganism. “We believeitwould be too wrongtoascribetoo much importance to these phenomena,” the daily Verdens Gang stated in an editorial: “…in most cases, this seems to be brattishbehaviour committed by irresponsible and thoughtless youngsters.”¹⁸ One reason for this ambiguity,Johansen suggests, was that the incidents wereinterpreted differentlywhenthey werecommitted in Norwaythan when

 Bachner, Återkomsten,13–19,quotation p. 14.Translation by Simonsen.  Karl Egil Johansen, “Jødefolket inntar en særstilling.” Norskehaldningar til jødane og staten Israel (Kristiansand: Portal,2008), 88–89.  Johansen, “Jødefolket inntar en særstilling,” 88–92,statement on p. 90.  Extract from quote, cited in Johansen, “Jødefolketinntar en særstilling,” 89–90.Translation by Simonsen. 178 Kjetil Braut Simonsen they werecommitted in Germany. This corresponds with Henrik Bachner’sre- search in Sweden. While the wave of incidentsinGermanywas more or less uni- versallyrepresented as arevival of antisemitism, manyconsidered it unlikely that such incidents in Sweden could be caused by homegrown antisemitism.¹⁹ In other words, although antisemitism wascondemned, it was also, to acertain extent,reducedtoaGerman (and fascist) phenomenon. Asecond relevant publication is aPhD dissertation from 2014,writtenbyhis- torian JonReitan. Themain focus of the thesis is the thematization and represen- tation of the Holocaust in Norway from 1945tothe present.AccordingtoReitan, anational-heroic narrative functioned as ahegemonic interpretation of the Nazi erainthe first decades after 1945. An unbridgeable dividing line was drawnbe- tween the “good nationalforces” (the resistancemovement) and the un-national elements (Nasjonal Samling). As aresult of this interpretation, antifascistnorms and values were linked to the formation and reconsolidation of apostwarnation- al identity.²⁰ Although this is not discussed in depth by the author,his empirical material clearlyshows the extent to which antisemitism was associated with Nazi Germa- ny and the Norwegian Nazi collaborators,and, therefore, described as un-Norwe- gian and unacceptable.²¹ This implied onlylimited systematic critical reflection on homegrown antisemitism in Norwaybefore 1940. “The profound decline in cultureonwhich the hatred of the Jews depends,” Dagbladet,for example, pointed out in an editorial in 1947, “ has fortunatelynot been experienced in Nor- way. Here, in this country,ahuman is still ahuman.”²² Athird work is a2006 master’sdissertation written by historian IngjerdVei- den Brakstad. Brakstad focuses on the description and remembrance of the Nazi persecution of the Jews between 1942and 1948. Throughthis, she also highlights importantmaterial relatedtothe perception of antisemitism duringthe first postwar years. Like Reitan, Brakstad notes that the rejection of antisemitism in many cases was related to “national character,” a “Norwegianmentality” which had been resistant to antisemitism since the days of Henrik Wergeland.²³ Further- more, she provides several examples of everydayNorwegian antisemitism. For

 Bachner, Återkomsten,139–40.  JonReitan, “Møtermed Holocaust: Norskeperspektiverpåtilintetgjørelsens historiekultur” (PhDthesis,Trondheim: NTNU,2014), 99.  Reitan, “Møtermed Holocaust,” 99–136,esp. quotations on p. 132.  Quoted in Reitan, Møtermed Holocaust,132. Translation by Simonsen.  Ingjerd Veiden Brakstad, “Jødeforfølgelsene iNorge:Omtale iårene 1942. Framstillingog erindringavjødeforfølgelsene iNorge under andreverdenskrig,iet utvalgaviser og illegal presse” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2006), 83 – 85. 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 179 example, duringadebate about Jewish displaced persons in 1947, one Norwe- gian housing cooperative (borettslag)opposed the creation of a “Jewishquarter” in their neighbourhood.²⁴ Afourth work is aPhD dissertationbyhistorian Vibeke Kieding Banik, analysingthe attitudes of Norwegian Jews towards Israel between 1945and 1975.In this work, antisemitic attitudes in Norwayduringthe earlypostwar period are discussed over five pages. Banik suggests that latent antisemitic attitudes existed in Norway.However,she does not reach aconclusion as to how widespread such attitudes werewithin the population as awhole.²⁵ To sum up, we know from existing research that antisemitism was already viewed as an un-national and un-Norwegian phenomenon duringthe initial period after the end of the German occupation. However,tensions between apublic discourse dominatedbyarejection of antisemitic sentiments and the continua- tion of an informal “everydayantisemitism” have still not been studied in depth. Several questions remain in need of answers:What new expressionsofantisem- itism have developed in asociety whereopen ideological antisemitism waspor- trayed as un-Norwegian?Has the anti-antisemiticnorm been strengthened or weakened over time? Also, to what extent and how has “everydayantisemitism” affected the relationship between majority and minority?

Antisemitism on the farright

Before and during the Second World War, antisemitism in Norway – as in other European countries – took aparticularlyradical form on the extreme right.The Norwegian collaborationistparty Nasjonal Samling (NS),especiallyfrom 1935 onwards,embraced antisemitism as acomprehensive “explanatory model.” In NS publications, bolshevism, capitalism, and liberalism were described as “Jewish phenomena.” During the German occupation of Norway, NS leader Vidkun Quis- ling sawthe ongoingworld war as alife and death struggle between the “Ger- manic people” and “International Jewry.”²⁶

 Brakstad, JødeforfølgelseneiNorge,88.  Vibeke KiedingBanik, “Solidaritet og tilhørighet:Norskejøders forholdtil Israel 1945–1975” (PhDthesis,University of Oslo, 2009), 102–06.  See Simonsen, “Vidkun Quisling, antisemittismen og den paranoide stil”;ChristhardHoff- mann, “Die reine Lehre einer politischen Sekte: Antisemitismus in der norwegischen ‘Nasjonal Samling’,” in Vorurteil und Rassenhaß. Antisemitismus in den faschistischen Bewegungen Euro- pas,ed. Hermann Graml, AngelikaKönigseder,and Juliane Wetzel (Berlin: Metropol, 2001), 253–73. 180 Kjetil Braut Simonsen

To what extent did the Norwegian far right maintain this conspiracist and antisemitic worldview after 1945, within apolitical context wherethe expression of ideological antisemitismwas taboo?Towhat extent has antisemitism been re- placed by other images of the enemy? During the first decades after the Second World War, an important task of the Norwegian farright was the attempt to rehabilitate former members of the NS. Forthese people, the German capitulation and the postwar trials led to a widespread decline in power and status.²⁷ Asmall segment of this group sought to implement organizational measures to rehabilitate the NS veterans socially, legally, and historically.²⁸ The developmentofanorganized neofascist community in Norway has often been dated to the late 1960s, when anew generation of far rightists foundedthe organization Nasjonal Ungdomsfylking (NUF) and later,in1975, the party Norsk Front (renamed Nasjonalt Folkeparti in 1980). Asecond phase began in the late 1980s with the development of organized activism against immigration and the formation of amilitant neo-Nazi skinhead subculture. After 2000,the militant right-wing extremistsubculture stagnated markedly. At the sametime, anew anti-Muslim conspiracist discourse developedinthe aftermath of Septem- ber 11,2001. Since the turn of the millennium, traditionalneo-Nazism has primarilybeen located in small organizations such as the Odinist sect Vigrid and the pan-Nordic National Socialist organization Den nordiske motstandsbevegel- sen (Nordic Resistance Movement), which has asmall branch in Norway.²⁹ The functions and development of far-right antisemitism during the postwar period have primarilybeen studied as part of amore general analysis of right- wing extremist ideologyand practice. One article written by this author and published in the Norwegian peer-reviewed journal Historisktidsskrift Winter 2019, deals with the development of Holocaust denial discourse in the magazine 8. Mai/Folk og land between 1948 and 1975.This magazine was publishedby

 Duringthe postwar treason trials,the NS was categorized as acriminalpolitical organization. Atotalofninety-twothousand cases wereinvestigated, and about forty-six thousand persons weresentencedtovarious kinds of punishment,ranging fromfines to the death penalty. See JohannesAndenæs, Det vanskelige oppgjøret (Oslo:Tanum-Nordli,1979),114– 24,165 – 68.  See GeorgØvsthus, “Dom og oppreisning:Tidligere NS-medlemmers kritikk av landssvik- oppgjøret og deresorganiserte forsøk på åoppnå sosial rehabilitering” (master’sdissertation, University of Bergen, 1972), 4, 7– 26.  Foranoverview of the different historical phasesand the present situation, see Tore Bjørgo and Ingvild Magnæs Gjelsvik, “Utviklingogutbredelse av høyreekstremisme iNorge,” in Høyreekstremisme iNorge:Utviklingstrekk, konspirasjonsteorier og forebyggingsstrategier,ed. Tore Bjørgo (Oslo:Politihøgskolen iOslo, 2018), 27–144. 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 181 the organized community of former NS members.³⁰ The publication promoted not onlyNSapologist historicalpoints of view,but alsoanti-democratic, racist, and antisemitic sentiments. Holocaust denial was embraced as earlyasthe late 1940s onwards and became an integral element of broader NS revisionist argu- ments duringthe 1950s,1960s, and 1970s. Thisdenialistdiscourse also implied a conspiracist outlook on the world. Several articles in 8. Mai/Folk og land claimed that “International Jewry” was the “real instigator” of the Second World Warand that the “myth of the six million dead” had been created by apowerful cabal, aiming to suppress the “true nationalforces.”³¹ In this case, the community of formerNSmembers functioned as an ideological bridge between traditional Na- tional Socialism and postwarneofascism. On the one hand,the milieu kept alive traditionalimages of the powerful and threatening “Jew.” On the other,the NS veterans wereinstrumental in introducing new ideological themesadapted to the postwar context,such as denial of the Nazi Extermination Policy.Antisemitic ideas also won support from actors who did not come from an NS background but still harboured right-wingviews. In one recent book, historian of ideas Jan Erik Ebbestad Hansen shows that leadinganthroposophist Alf Larsen advocated extreme anti-Jewish ideas duringthe immediate postwar years.³² Several studies of organized Norwegian right-wing extremismfrom the 1970s onwards have been published. The “first wave” of Norwegian neofascism from the late 1960s to the middle of the 1980s has been analysed in amonograph by journalist PerBangsund and in twomaster’sdissertations.³³ The neo-Nazi subculture of the 1990s has been studiedinparticularbysocial scientists Tore

 On Folk og land,see also Espen Olavsson Hårseth, “Folk og land 1967–75:Fra rehabilitering til nyfascistisk opposisjonsorgan” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2010) and “Mellom revisjon og politisk opposisjon:Avisen Folk og land 1952–1975,” Historisktidsskrift 3(2017): 280–307; Lasse Lømo Ellingsen, “‘Folk og land – kor går du?’ Avisen Folk og land, miljøet rundtden og forholdet til nynazismen iNorge 1975 – 1986” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2016).  Kjetil BrautSimonsen, “Holocaustbenektelse i Folk og land (8. mai), 1948–1975:Endiskurs tar form,” Historisktidsskrift 1(2019), 8‒25, ‹ https://www.idunn.no/file/pdf/67111948/hol ocaustbenektelse_i_folk_og_land_8_mai_19481975_en_.pdf ›.  JanErik Ebbestad Hansen, En antisemitt trer frem:Alf Larsen og ‘jødeproblemet’ (Oslo:Press, 2018).  See Lars Preus, “Bakover mot det nyeNorge:Ideologisk utviklinginnen norsk nynazisme 1967–1985” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2014); Tuva Marie Mcallister Buraas, “‘Jegoppfatter meg ikke som nazist,men som nasjonal revolusjonær.’ Erik Blüchers politiske ideologi, 1975 – 1985” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2018) and PerBangsund, Arvtak- erne: Nazisme iNorge etter krigen (Oslo:Pax, 1984). 182 Kjetil Braut Simonsen

Bjørgo and Katrine Fangen.³⁴ Also, the small neo-Nazi organizations of the 2000s have been researched, mostlythrough works by graduatestudents.³⁵ Fewof these works have antisemitism as the main focus,³⁶ but they nevertheless de- scribe and discuss the phenomenon. Based on these works – as well as my on- going research – Ithink three points related to the continuityand functions of antisemitism within Norwegian far-right circles should be highlighted.³⁷ 1) As adiscourse, far-right antisemitism in Norwaysince 1945has consisted of twomain components.The first is conspiracism: the claim thataninternation- al Jewish conspiracy controls international politics and the economyand oper- ates as the driving forcebehind multiculturalism,globalization, and immigration. Thisnarrative is acontinuation of the classical anti-Jewishaccusations articulated in TheProtocols of the Elders of Zion and in National Socialist prop- aganda.³⁸ Thesecond component is the denial of the Holocaust.This is anew feature of postwar antisemitism, although it buildsupon old images of apowerful “International Jewry.” As alreadynoted, Holocaust denial was expressed reg-

 Katrine Fangen, En bok om nynazister (Oslo:Universitetsforlaget, 2001); TomKimmo Eiternes and Katrine Fangen, Bak nynazismen (Oslo:Cappelen, 2002); Tore Bjørgo, Racist and Right-Wing Violence in Scandinavia:Patterns,Perpetrators and Responses (Oslo:Tano, 1997), 272–311;Tonje Benneche, “Ideologiske knyttnever: Konflikt mellom blitzereognynazister på 1980-og1990-tal- let” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2017).  See Anett SvevadRiise, “Runemagi og raseideologi: En komparativanalyse av to nyhe- denske, nynazistiskebevegelser” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2018); Elise Egeland Nerheim, “Nordfront og nettekstremisme: Den nordiskemotstandsbevegelsens fiendebilder” (master’sdissertation, University of Agder,2015); Siw-Randi JungeKåsereff, “‘Jegerikke mik- rorasist,men makrorasist’:Enantropologisk studie av Vigrid” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2009); Lill-Hege Tveito, “Kampen for den nordiske rases overlevelse: Bruken av den norrøne mytologien innenfor Vigrid” (master’sdissertation, University of Tromsø, 2007); Astrid Espseth, “Stemplingens konsekvens:Enstudie av nynazistiskegrupperinger” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2007); Ellen Nygård, “Nynazisme på nett: En studie av historiebruk på Vigrid og Nordfronts nettsteder” (master’sdissertation, University of Stavanger, 2015); Magnus Stavrum Opheim, “Motstandskamp på internett: En diskursanalyse av nettsiden Fri- hetskamp.net” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2017).  One exception is amaster’sdissertation on the Holocaust denier OlavHoaas.See Ingrid Sæ- theren Grimstad, “En studie av OlavHoaas sitt ideologiske standpunkt” (master’sdissertation, University of Oslo, 2014).  Lately, Ihavecarried out in-depth research on Norwegian far-right antisemitism after 1945 and have also written an article on the subject which is yettobepublished. Kjetil Braut Simon- sen, “Antisemitism on the Norwegian FarRight,1967–2018” (forthcoming).  On the 1970sand 1980s, see for example, Preus, “Bakover,” 50 –57;onthe 1990s,Bjørgo, Racist and Right-Wing Violence,272–311 and Fangen, En bokomnynazister,182–89;onthe conspiracism of the neo-Nazis in the 2000s, see for example Opheim,Motstandskamp på internett, 64–66;SvevadRiise,Runemagi og raseideologi,47–50. 9Norwegian Antisemitism after1945 183 ularlyinthe NS veterans’ publication Folk og land duringthe 1950s and 1960s. From the late 1960s onwards,denialist discourse was adopted by the new generation of right-wing extremists and has been arecurrent theme in neo-Nazi circles up to the present.³⁹ 2) The functions of far-right antisemitisminNorwayhaveprimarilybeen abstract and ideological. Antisemitism has served as an explanatory model, inte- gratingall phenomena perceivedasnegative and/or threateningunder the same (“Jewish”)umbrella. As noted by social scientistKatrine Fangen, antisemitism in this case alsotends to be the “esoteric” part of right-wingextremist ideology, which is internalized by new activists onlygradually.⁴⁰ In this sense, it is amarker of political dedicationand radicalization. 3) Antisemitism as aworldview has not been universallyembraced within far-right circles since 1945. Anti-Jewishideas have been supplemented with, and partlyreplacedby, new images of the enemy, duringthe last couple of years particularlyanti-Muslim conspiracy narratives. One case in point is the right-wing extremist terrorist Anders Behring Breivik, who murdered seventy- seven people in Oslo and at Utøya. Breivik’spolitical beliefs werebased on a conspiracy narrative,which claimed that an alliance of Muslims and “Cultural Marxists” was undermining European civilization.⁴¹ Still, within the broader floraofright-wingradical organizations,antisemitism has often functioned as amarker of arevolutionary and militant outlook.⁴² Supportfor antisemitism suggests support for amore or less total worldview. Amongst groups and actors who have tried to appear moderate or responsible, or who have advocated ideological renewal, antisemitism has been either coded or absent. This alsobears witness to the extent to which Nazi and fascistantisemitism has been rejected by the broader publicsince 1945.⁴³

 See Preus, “Bakover,” 55–56;Grimstad, “En studie av OlavHoaas”;Simonsen, “Antisemit- tisme på norsk ytre høyre”;Nygård, “Nynazisme på nett.”  Fangen, En bok om nynazister,184–86.  On Breivik’sideology,see Øystein Sørensen, “Ideologi og galskap:Anders BehringBreiviks totalitærementalitet,” in Høyreekstremisme: Ideer og bevegelser iEuropa,ed. Øystein Sørensen, Bernt Hagtvet,and Bjørn Arne Steine (Oslo:Dreyer, 2012), 14– 44.OnIslamophobia in Norwayin general, see Sindre Bangstad, AndersBreivik and the Rise of Islamophobia (London: Zed Books, 2014).  Bjørgo, Racist and Right-Wing Violence,294.  These threepoints areelaborated further in Simonsen, “Antisemitism on the Norwegian Far Right”. 184 Kjetil Braut Simonsen

Israel and leftist antisemitism

One of the most heatedtopics related to postwar antisemitisminNorway and other parts of Europe is the relationship between antisemitism and criticism of Israel. In an essayabout “the new antisemitism,” Norwegian historian of ideas Håkon Harket claims that the State of Israelhas been one of the focal points of antisemitism since 1945.⁴⁴ Although neither strong criticism of Israel nor anti-Zionismare necessary or sufficient conditions for antisemitism, he concludes,the debate about Israel has provided anew platform for the articulation of anti-Jewish prejudice.⁴⁵ In Sweden, the relationship between the left and antisemitism in general, and between anti-Israel and antisemitic sentiments in particular, have been studied in detail by historian Henrik Bachner.⁴⁶ In Norway,nosuch general work currentlyexists. However,several works have touched upon the subject. In his book on Norwegian attitudes towards the Jews and Israel, historian Karl Egil Johansen discusses the borders between antisemitism and critical attitudes towards Israelatsome length. Aspecial focus is directed towards the debate about well-known author Jostein Gaarder’scolumn “God’sChosenPeople” in 2006.⁴⁷ Following this publication, Gaarder wasaccused of reproducing antisemitic and anti-Jewish sentiments. Still, Johansen’swork is more astudyofthe shifting opinions about Israel/Palestine in general thanasystematic discussion of postwar antisemitism. He does not provide explicit conclusions on how prevalent antisemitism has been in this debate, nor on wherethe borders between anti-Jewishsentiments and legitimate political criticism of the State of Israel should be drawnmore precisely.⁴⁸ Recently, the changingattitudes towardsIsra- el and Zionism within the Norwegian labour movement have also been analysed in detail by historian Åsmund Borgen Gjerde. However,the borders between anti- Zionismand antisemitismare not the main focus of his dissertation.⁴⁹

 Håkon Harket, “Den nyeantisemittismen,” in Jødehat: Antisemittismens historie fraantikken til idag,ed. TrondBergEriksen, Håkon Harket,and Einhart Lorenz (Oslo: Cappelen Damm, 2005), 579.  Harket, “Den nyeantisemittismen,” 580.  Bachner, Återkomsten.  Jostein Gaarder, “Guds utvalgte folk,” Aftenposten,4August 2006, ‹ https://www.aftenpos ten.no/meninger/kronikk/i/weW34/Guds-utvalgte-folk ›.  Johansen, “Jødefolket inntar en særstilling,” in particular 163–70.  Åsmund BorgenGjerde, “The MeaningofIsrael: Anti-Zionism and Philo-Zionism in the Nor- wegian Left,1933 – 1968” (PhDthesis,University of Bergen, 2018). 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 185

Acontribution of amuch more polemicalnature thanJohansen’sbook is an article writtenbythe Norwegianauthor Eirik Eiglad and published in the anthology Resurgent Antisemitism: Global Perspectives in 2013.Eiglad focuses on the ideological position of the Norwegian far left in the late 1960sand analyses its effects on present-day debates about the Middle East.One of his main argu- ments is that while, in the early1970s, antisemitism “was not ageneral problem in Norway,” the present situation in 2013 had become much more dangerous:

Today, the situation has changed. Alarmingreportsofanti-Jewish harassmentand vandal- ism have become morecommon, and manyattitudes that can properlybetermedantisem- itic have become publiclyacceptable, as open antisemitic rhetoric has been smuggledback into mainstream political debates – we even have seen explosive outbursts of antisemitic hatredonthe streets of the capital.⁵⁰

Eiglad explains this shift by focusing on the rise of anti-Zionism as apolitical forceonthe left from the late 1960s onwards, in particularrelated to the influ- ence of Maoism. “The Maoists,” he states, “introduced anti-ZionismtoNorway, first through SUFand then later through AKP (m-l) and its front organizations.”⁵¹ Since the 1970sthis narrative “migrated” from the Maoist left to the left in general.⁵² However,Eiglad does not present anyempirical material from the period between the 1970sand the late 2000s. In this sense, the causes of the development of anti-Zionist opinion – and in Eiglad’sview,the growingthreat of antisemitism – are suggested rather thandiscussed in asystematic historical man- ner. Athird work, with acontemporary rather than historicalfocus, is an essay on leftist antisemitism written by journalist John Færseth. Although the Norwe- gian left generallydoes not holdantisemitic views, Færsethclaims, parts of the

 Eirik Eiglad, “Anti-Zionism and the ResurgenceofAntisemitism in Norway,” in Resurgent An- tisemitism: Global Perspectives,ed. Alvin H. Rosenfeld (Bloomington &Indianapolis:Indiana University Press, 2013), 140 – 41.The same writer has also written apersonalreportofaseries of antisemiticincidents occurringduring apro-Palestinian demonstration in Oslo in January 2009.See Eirik Eiglad, TheAnti-JewishRiots in Oslo (Porsgrunn: Communalism Press, 2010).  Eiglad, “Anti-Zionism and the ResurgenceofAntisemitism in Norway,” 142.  “In the early1970s,anti-Zionism was consideredafringephenomenon associated with the Maoist-influencedleft … Anti-Zionist attitudes arenow respectable; they areheld by leadingfig- uresinacademic life, trade unions,and politics,and have clearlycolored Norway’sinterpreta- tion of the conflict in the Middle East.” Eiglad, “Anti-Zionism and the ResurgenceofAntisemit- ism in Norway,” 150 –151. 186 Kjetil Braut Simonsen left tend to overlook anti-Jewish statements or to accept them as asort of legitimate critique of the politics of Israel.⁵³ The relationship between attitudes towards Israel and antisemitism is also discussed in tworeports on attitudes towards Jews and otherminorities published by the Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies.⁵⁴ Attitudes towards the conflictare sorted into three categories: pro-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, and anti-Israeli. One finding is that respondents with anti-Israeli attitudes show astronger tendencytoembrace antisemitic sentimentsthan the more moderate pro-Palestinianrespondents. Still, one main conclusion was that negative views on Israel and its policies were much more common than negative sentiments towards Jews. Fornine out of ten respondents who expressed acritical stand against Israeli policies, the reportconcludes, negative attitudes towardsJews can hardlyserve as the explanation.⁵⁵ The reportfrom the 2017 surveyalso con- cluded that the relationship between pro-Palestinianattitudes and antisemitism was rather weak.⁵⁶ To acertain extent,this seems to call into question or at least to moderate Eiglad’sthesis of aclear connection between sharp criticism of Is- rael and arising tolerance for antisemitism. Further research should dig much deeper into the historicaldebates on Isra- el and antisemitism, bothonthe left and in society at large.Havepro-Israeli attitudes necessarilyimplied aprincipled rejectionofanti-Jewish stereotypes?Did the changingperspectivesfrom the late 1960s and 1970sonwards lead to aweak- ening of the anti-antisemitic norm amongst the Norwegian public?Has the awareness of antisemitism within pro-Palestiniancirclesbeen strengthened or weakened over time?

Contemporaryantisemitism

Several of the latest works on antisemitism since 1945haveconcentratedoncon- temporary attitudes towards Jews and other minorities rather than on historical

 John Færseth, “Den tolererte antisemittismen,” in Venstreekstremisme: Ideer og bevegelser, ed. Øystein Sørensen, Bernt Hagtvet,and NikBrandal (Oslo:Dreyer,2013), 304–19,esp. p. 316.  ChristhardHoffmann, VibekeMoe, and Øivind Kopperud, eds, Antisemittisme iNorge? Den norskebefolkningens holdninger til jøder og andreminoriteter (Oslo: The Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies,2012), 18–19,71–73;ChristhardHoffmann and VibekeMoe, eds, Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge:Befolkningsundersøkelse og minoritetsstudie (Oslo: The Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies,2017), 22, 94.  Hoffmann, Moe, and Kopperud, Antisemittisme iNorge?,73.  Hoffmann and Moe, Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge,94. 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 187 developments from 1945tothe present.Four works shallbediscussed here, three of them primarilyofaquantitative natureand the fourth aqualitative study. As alreadynoted, in 2012 the Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies published areport basedonanautumn 2011 survey of attitudes towards Jews and otherreligious minorities in Norwegian society.Fiveyears later,two surveyspartlyfollowing up on the 2012 reportwereanalysed in anew publication. The 2017 report focused on attitudes towards Jews and Muslims but also contained aminority studyinwhich Jews and Muslims in Norwaywereasked about their experiencesand attitudes towards each other.Inbothstudies, attitudes are categorized in threedimensions: cognitive and affective dimensions, as well as the dimension of social distance. The 2012 reportfound overall that 12.5 per cent of the Norwegian population held attitudes based on negative stereotypes of Jews. In the 2017 survey,the number had decreased to 8.3per cent.One noteworthyfinding was the highper- centage supporting the statement “World Jewry is workingbehind the scenes to promoteJewish interests” (19 per cent in 2011, 13 per cent in 2017).⁵⁷ Asuggested explanation for the shift is the growingfocus on antisemitism from the mass media as well as from politicians in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Paris and Copenhagen in 2015.⁵⁸ The reports also discuss the different factors which seem to make respondents receptivetoantisemitic views. As alreadynoted, one conclusion was that while most respondents with critical attitudes towards Israel did not hold antisemitic sentiments, such attitudes weremorecommon among respondents clas- sified as anti-Israeli than among other respondents.⁵⁹ Furthermore, antisemitism was more common among men and less prevalentamong younger persons and persons with higher education.⁶⁰ The 2017 reportalso concludes that negative attitudes towards Muslims are much more common thannegative attitudes towards Jews. Overall, 34.1 per cent of the respondents held anti-Muslim stereotypes.⁶¹ Also, one main conclusion is thatantisemitism was most common among respondents with sceptical attitudes towards other minorities and immi- grants. In other words, it seems to be related to abroader xenophobic mindset.⁶²

 Hoffmann, Moe, and Kopperud, Antisemittisme iNorge?,6,22; Hoffmann and Moe, Holdning- er til jøder og muslimer iNorge,7,36.  Hoffmann and Moe, Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge,98–99.  Hoffmann, Moe, and Kopperud, Antisemittisme iNorge?,71–73.  Hoffmann, Moe, and Kopperud, AntisemittismeiNorge?,60; Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge,8.  Hoffmann and Moe, Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge,7.  Hoffmann and Moe, Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge,91–100. 188 Kjetil Braut Simonsen

The 2017 report also shows that antisemitic sentiments are overrepresented among the Muslim majority in Norway. While negative attitudes against Muslims weremarkedlyless prevalent among Jewishrespondents (14.7per cent compared to 34.1 per cent), negative stereotypes of Jews weremore common among Muslim respondents than within the majorityofthe population (28.9per cent compared with 8.3 per cent). However,while stereotypical images of Jewish power are prevalent,the differencebetween the Muslim sample and the population sample re- garding social distance and anti-Jewish sentiments is minimal.⁶³ Athird studydealing with contemporary antisemitism, this time on aqualitative basis, is areport titled Det som er jødisk, written by researchers Alexa Døving and Vibeke Moe.The studyisempiricallybased on interviews with thirty-three persons identifying themselvesasJewish, supplemented by interview material collected by Det mosaiske trossamfunn (the JewishReligious Community in Norway). The project had threegoals: to identify how NorwegianJews per- ceivedtheir own Jewishidentity,toclarify the relationship between historical consciousness about the Holocaust and experiences of identity,and to analyse how antisemitism is interpreted and discussed by Jewish families.⁶⁴ The third question, which is discussed in the last section of the report,ismost relevant to our context.Aparticularlyinteresting finding is the manyexamples of “everydayantisemitism” provided by the interviewees. As summarizedinthe report:

Altogether,the informantsgivethe impression that it is part of their everydayexperience for Norwegian Jews to be met with stereotypical sentiments.Which stereotypes areexpressed depends on the context, the situational frame of the event,and whothe performer is.⁶⁵

Accordingtothe informants, the Israel/Palestine conflict is of particularimpor- tance regardingantisemitism today. Nearlyall informants described the debate about the conflict as being at times unpleasant.⁶⁶ One last work related to contemporary antisemitism is apilot studyofanti- semitisminthe media today, conducted by two researchers associatedwith the Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies. The studyisbased on a limited number of strategicallyselectedsources from the edited news media and the comment sections in online newspapers and on Facebook. The material was studied through acombination of quantitative content analysis and qualita-

 Hoffmann and Moe, Holdninger til jøder og muslimer iNorge,8.  Cora Alexa Døvingand VibekeMoe, “Det som er jødisk.” Identiteter,historier og erfaringer med antisemittisme (Oslo:The Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies,2014).  Døvingand Moe, “Det som er jødisk,” 88. Translation by Simonsen.  Døvingand Moe, “Det som er jødisk,” 89. 9Norwegian Antisemitism after 1945 189 tive reviews.Also, 250tweets with the hashtag “Jew” wereincluded in the qualitative section. The studyconcludes that although the numberofanti-Jewishster- eotypes was relatively small they werestill expressed bothinreaders’ comments and in the edited media. In the edited media, most problematic and antisemitic sentiments occurred in non-editorial texts.Furthermore, such sentiments were more widespread in comment sections than in articles. In the tweets,akind of satirical antisemitism was identified. Here, the hashtag “Jew” was usedasasyn- onym for negative behaviour associated with finance and profit.⁶⁷ Viewed as awhole, the scope and nature of antisemitism in Norwaytoday have to some degree been exposed.However,moresystematic qualitative analysis of representations of the Jewincontemporarymainstream discourse as well as in extremist circles is called for.Such researchisbeing conducted at the mo- ment through the “ShiftingBoundaries” project,based at the NorwegianCenter for Holocaust and MinorityStudies in Oslo. Here, antisemitism – for instance, in new social media – willberesearched in depth.⁶⁸

Conclusion

Until afew decades ago, antisemitism in Norwaywas thematized onlytoalim- ited extent by historians.Today, in contrast to this, our knowledge has grown considerably. Nonetheless,numerous topics,several of which are related to the postwar period, need to be explored further.Asaconclusion to this article, Iwould like to point to some areas which in my view should be emphasized in further research. We know from existing research that anti-Jewishexpressions became taboo in Norway after 1945and antisemitism as aworldview survivedonlyonthe fringe of society among marginalfar-right groups.Inthis sense, postwar antisemitism in Norway can, to alarge extent,bedescribed as antisemitism “without anti- Semites.”⁶⁹ Still, little researchfocuses on how the anti-antisemitic norm has been maintained over time. On ageneral level, we know more about contemporary antisemitism than about the historicaldevelopment of Norwegian antisem-

 See especiallythe summary in Lars Lien and JanAlexander Brustad, Medieanalyse av antisemittisme idag (Oslo: The Norwegian Center for Holocaust and Minority Studies,2016), 9.  See “Shifting Boundaries.Definitions,Expressionsand Consequences of Antisemitism in Con- temporaryNorway,”‹https://www.hlsenteret.no/forskning/jodisk-historie-og-antisemittisme/shift ing-boundaries-definitions-expressions-and/ ›.  The term is used in Bernd Marin, “APost-Holocaust ‘Anti-Semitism without Anti-Semites’? Austria as aCase in Point,” PoliticalPsychology 2, no. 2(1980): 57–74. 190 Kjetil Braut Simonsen itism from 1945tothe present.Thus, one priority should be to analyse the development of Norwegian postwar antisemitism on abroad historicalbasis. To what extent and how has postwar antisemitism changed over time? Which elements of antisemitism survivedthe experience of the Holocaust,which have been weakened, and which have faded away?How has antisemitism been expressed in a society whereopenlyanti-Jewishstatements have become taboo?Inwhat kind of situations and contexts has antisemitism reoccurred, and have the anti-antisemitic norms grown weaker or strongerovertime? Furthermore, an important subtopic is the scope and developmentofevery- dayNorwegianantisemitism,both as adiscourse and as aform of practice.How has antisemitism been expressed outside the public sphere, and not least,how have such “everydayexpressions” of antisemitism affected the Jewishminority? Such afocus would deepen our knowledge and allow us to understand Norwe- gian antisemitismonamore general level. It would alsooffer insight into the challenges facing minorities in modernNorway.